COULSTON & WALTERS

The matter before Altobelli J concerned competing applications between the parents regarding their two children, X and Y. The dispute centred on arrangements for the children, including their schooling and residence, with particular regard to the impact of the father's alleged drug use and violence.

The court was required to determine the best interests of the children, considering the objects of the *Family Law Act 1975* (Cth), particularly the need to protect children from harm. This involved assessing the father's parental capacity, his ongoing drug use, and the impact of past violence on the children. The court also had to consider the competing proposals of both parents, based on the available evidence, which was limited to untested allegations and objective material.

Altobelli J applied the principles outlined in section 60CC of the *Family Law Act 1975*, which mandates consideration of primary and additional factors when determining the best interests of a child. The court noted the importance of protecting children from harm, as set out in section 60B, and referenced the Full Court's decision in *Goode*, which required consideration of sections 60CC, 61D, and 65DAA in interim applications. The court acknowledged that a full investigation could only occur at a final hearing and that its current inquiry was necessarily shortened.

The court made several orders, including an adjournment for a mention hearing. It directed the parents to ascertain if the children could be re-enrolled in their previous school and, if so, to enrol them. The mother was ordered to return the children to a specific area between 3 and 13 July 2015. Until the children's return, existing orders for the father's supervised time were to continue, and upon their return, previous orders for supervised time were to be reinstated.